How tall is Brad Pitt

Brad Pitt's Height

5ft 11in (180.3 cm)

American actor best known for movies such as Se7en, Fight Club, Snatch, Oceans Films, Troy, Inglorious Bastards, Interview With The Vampire and World War Z. A newspaper article on heights (washington post) quoted as saying people had seen Pitt put down 5ft 10 on an audition form for his height. Well, before he was A-list, aged 24 he wrote his own height as 5ft 11 in a teen magazine profile. At times he can appear taller, but with impeccable posture and at times, in the last few years, cuban type heels, that is a given. Even his good friend George Clooney was wise to his footwear, saying once in USA Today that "He's tall. He's like 6-1. It's irritating."

How tall is Brad Pitt
Brad with Angelina Jolie, Jonah Hill and Claudia Schiffer
Photo by PR Photos

Add a Comment 250 comments

Average Guess (480 Votes)
5ft 10.54in (179.2cm)
Pierre said on 18/Sep/17
Sorry i made a mistake
Click Here Click Here Click Here
Here are the shoes= Click Here
Sam said on 17/Sep/17

Me, and probably a lot of other people considering the average guess is 5'10.5.
Rising - 174 cm said on 17/Sep/17
I think Pitt has a bigger heel with Gosling at the Golden Globes than with Yeun: Click Here But he was still at least an inch shorter than Gosling: Click Here Of course in either this case or the case with Yeun, differences can always look bigger or smaller than they are.

@Hijopotamus: 180 doesn't make sense because at the end of the post, you acknowledge I think Pitt is 179. It should go without saying I didn't think you meant 289 literally. I knew it was either a typo as you now confirm or you were using an excessively high number as your way of saying I upgrade Pitt ridiculously so I was messing with you as that seems to be the only way you communicate. Pitt looking taller than he is due to better than average posture and larger than average footwear is a given as Rob says at the top of the page: "At times he can appear taller, but with impeccable posture and at times, in the last few years, cuban type heels, that is a given." This is my criticism of you - that you play dumb or misrepresent my position at times - not that you think Pitt is 2 cm shorter than I do.

@Dmeyer: Nobody should hate you for any comment. I personally suspect Pitt may have worn lifts on occasion, but I've made the point that I've seen no definitive proof of it. As for Vin Diesel, I think he sometimes just wears boots with 1.5"-1.75" heels and up to a 1" platform and forces his posture like Stallone did a decade ago. I don't think most of his boots are actual elevator boots and sometimes, I'm sure he doesn't even have lifts inside, but other times, he may have used insert lifts in those. But I suspect he does have some elevator boots among the many pairs you see him in as well. Typically Vin will look in the 6'0"-6'0.5" range when wearing them, but sometimes he manages to pass for as tall as a legit 6'1".

But in Pitt's case, the fact we also get a good look at Pitt's footwear on Conan when he was promoting Troy and they turn out completely normal 1" range: Click Here and it should at least tell people he's not Robert Downey Jr. Pitt in footwear was still much shorter than Conan when Conan was barefoot. I think Conan is more 6'3.5" than 6'4" as well and the difference was tough to pinpoint, but I wouldn't guess less than a 4" difference.
John said on 17/Sep/17
@Original I agree 100%
Lol said on 16/Sep/17
Search "brad pitt barefoot" on google and scroll down until you will see a photo with gwyneth paltron who is 174cm. Both are barefoot.

Brad Pitt is 174cm or 5'8 1/2 and that's the truth.

Brad wears 3.6 inch shoes all the time and that makes him 6 feet which is a 5'11 guy's height with normal shoes. 3.6 inch shoes are stealthy and looks the same as normal shoes so we have thought Brad was 5'10 haha.

5'8 is not bad, 2 inches below average.
Original said on 16/Sep/17
I also think Pitt is 177 (in fact somewhere between 176,5 and 178).
Pierre said on 16/Sep/17
@Tonyx=what?!You want to say Ben Affleck wear elevator shoes?!And so lots of time is easily taller than Georges and others?!No,it's impossible,Ben wear the same classic shoes as Brad.Or maybe...
Rising - 174 cm said on 16/Sep/17
That is surprising. We finally get Pitt in low cut shoes as opposed to boots yet he looks to me like he'd measure about 6'0"-6'0.25" in them or a solid 5'11" barefoot: Click Here Of course, this is based on the fact I believe Yeun is a 172 cm guy and I'm less sure of Giancarlo, but I'm assuming he's 171 cm, but has the most footwear as far as we can see. Obviously, a half inch lift isn't impossible and I still think he's a weak 5'11" or 5'10.75" at most regardless of why he looks taller there. Makes it tough to argue less than 5'10" or even a flat 5'10" there.
Mickey said on 16/Sep/17
5'10.75 ft... i'll still say it
Pierre said on 15/Sep/17
@Tonyx= Click Here And Georges is shorter than Brad with same shoes :).I must say Georges is slouching a little and lose a little height...But Brad isn't very straight...then...maybe... :)
Pierre said on 15/Sep/17
@Tonyx :)
Hijopotamus said on 15/Sep/17
@original, spot on
Pierre said on 15/Sep/17
And if Giancarlo had discreet lifts the day of the picture with you,Rob,then he would be not taller in his Cowboy heels the day of the pictures next to Brad;it is only a supposition of course :)
Tonyx said on 15/Sep/17
Who here thinks that Brad Pitt is 5ft11in? I mean besides Rob himself.
I think he is 5ft10in.
Dmeyer said on 15/Sep/17
Rob do you agree Brad at events like with Gosling or with Steven yeun were Pitt has à low cut dress shoe that shouldnt give him over 1,3in like à solid 3cm wich is near 1cm over à 0,8-0,9in normal dress shoe he manages to look à confortable 181cm Guy even flirting with 182cm with exelant posture or angle favoring , à Guy under 179,5-180cm couldnt do that and considering the foot pose it indicates that there isnt even 0,5in lifts , people here will probably hate me for this comment , it took 5-6cm to understand that Pitt dosnt wear lifts After seing millions of pics and trying lifts myself same for diesel i think he just like Nike shox and boots that give 1,8in , while Pitt wears more classy shoes anywere 1-1,5 in on rare occasion near 2in like with Redford or some première
Editor Rob: with Yeun I don't think his heel is much over 1 inch, it might be 3cm total including insole. Pitt sometimes does wear those cuban heels which look 1.4-1.5.
Hijopotamus said on 15/Sep/17
Pierre, thank you! From the back you can see those shoes are tricky.
@rob, lets see another one, please
Hijopotamus said on 14/Sep/17
Rising 289 was a typo, I meant 180
Anyone with a one single brain cell ON would get it.
No, I still don't understand what you mean. Maybe if you present an econometric model I would, but thanks for your efforts and time, really (not sarcastic)
You claim 179cm for Brad and I say 177cm
Big deal.
Pierre said on 14/Sep/17
@Slim don't poke the elephant
Tonyx said on 14/Sep/17
Pierre, oh wait, i think i was wrong. George Clooney is an inch shorter then Ben Affleck.
Click Here
Ben is listed by Rob at 6ft 2.25in (188.6 cm). So George must be a strong 6ft1in guy.
Thats it, I've nailed it. George Clooney is 6ft1in.
Original said on 14/Sep/17
I think Brad and Clooney are more or less of the same height (Clooney is 5'10) and in Venice I think there is much more chance of Clooney using lifts than Pitt and I don't agree with all those pics, clearly a good angle for George and the bad for Pitt. There is no more than 0.5' diference between these guys back to Venice.

About the Gwyneth pic this doesn't prove much of course, of course all non-fan boys know that Pitt is not 5'11 but also can not deny that this doesn't mean he is 5'9, everyone has good and bad pics, good and bad angles. I've seen many guys that personally are 5'11 looking 5'9.5/5'10 in some pics.

While there is a tendency for some users to be guess the less, Ryan Gosling with Tom Felton seemed to be easily 10cm taller than the last one, and Rob actually met Tom Felton and put him at 174cm, Rob was measured five hundred times and he is more than 173 at night. Yet some users here placed Gosling as 182.

I've seen all the photos of Brad Pitt and I'm convinced he's bigger than 5'9 and smaller than 5'11, there's no f.. way to look like almost 6'1 guy - even with all the lifts - being a flat 5'9.

In my opinion he is pretty close to 5'10 and not much smaller or bigger than that.
Slim said on 14/Sep/17
Beefy brad actually looks robs listing here, examining his proportions:
Slim said on 14/Sep/17
Hijopotamus, correct if wrong, aren't you over 6' now?
Tonyx said on 14/Sep/17
Perre, George Clooney is 5ft tall without his lifts.
Click Here
Tonyx said on 14/Sep/17
Click Here
:) said on 14/Sep/17
just give him 5'11/5'10.5 end of discussion.
Johno said on 13/Sep/17
I say Pitt looks 5'10, 5'11 a lot of the time with many celebs, with Paltrow he looks nothing more than 5'9.

He has a huge height variance when it comes to his estimation
Pierre said on 13/Sep/17
Click Here =And i think Giancarlo is a little shorter than 5"7.5'=i see a difference of a complete inch at the peak of your heads and you are slouching more than him imo.He had a little advantage of shoes too.He's 5"7' at the best of the best imo
Editor Rob: Giancarlo could be anywhere in 5ft 7-7.5 zone.
Pierre said on 13/Sep/17
@Rob @Hijopotamus
Click Here =The reason is maybe = comfortable external heel and shoes very high over the external heel then there is the place for a comfortable internal heel.Imo only the front of this shoes is looking very classic.
Rising - 174 cm said on 13/Sep/17
@Hijopotamus: Perhaps I have to dumb down my posts a little more for you. I mean Pitt often stands like he would to be measured while most people don't. If you watch somebody being measured, you'll usually see them straighten from how they were standing and would naturally measure somewhat lower had they not straightened up. My point is guys like Pitt often already stand like that. 1 cm is just a rough guess and rather arbitrary figure on my part for how much of a difference that will probably make and next to a guy like Clooney, it will often be more. How can I elucidate that any further? It's not even bad posture, it'd be more appropriate to call it casual posture for the average person, though someone like Clooney has bad posture. Anyone with an IQ over 100 will understand what I'm saying. I don't care about semantics whether you call it a disadvantage for those around Pitt or an advantage for Pitt.

And where on earth did you get "289"? We're not talking about Robert Wadlow. "Regular shoes" aren't 4 cm. That's what a cowboy boot will add. And because you're either an immature troll or you lack the most rudimentary understanding, you don't seem to grasp that I'm referring to what someone looks they'd measure barefoot compared to others. Almost everyone wears shoes. If we assume for arguments sake Pitt is even 5'10" flat then in 1" shoes standing casually, he's still going to look like a 5'10" man when out and about, though he'd obviously measure 5'11" barefoot. If he puts on a pair of Timberland type boots that add 1.5" over barefoot height then he'll look like a 5'10.5" man using a 5'10" man in typical 1" shoes as a reference - assuming you're guessing based on barefoot heights - and if that other 5'10" man is wearing thin shoes like Converse, which only add 0.6" over barefoot then Pitt would look more like 5'11" in comparison if we use the other man's barefoot height as a reference.

I hate wasting my time I explaining such simple things that should need no explanation so I suspect you're trolling to specifically waste my time. The whole "Pitt would look x if he were y" is tired, not to mention fallacious. If you mean he looks like a 183 cm man would in normal shoes then that certainly doesn't help your Pitt is under 5'10" fantasy. You act as though it's conceded by everyone that Pitt not only wears elevators all the time, but that he wears elevators that add over 3". I've not seen Pitt once in anything that looked potentially like a 3"-3.5" elevator. Once you get into that territory, there's no disguising it, except to those completely ignorant of elevator shoes and lifts. But again, I really don't know why I'm even bothering. Any fool can see Pitt at under 5'9" is nonsense when you see him with an actual 5'9" man like Mel Gibson(who even appears to have more footwear) or a formerly 5'9" man Anthony Hopkins, who was previously 5'8.5". Only those blinded by a desire for Pitt to be a certain height will see Pitt's shoes in Meet Joe Black as big enough to make a 5'9.5" man look 5'11.5".

@Pierre: No. My opinion didn't change, you simply didn't read my post or quote it properly. I said often has a 1 cm footwear ADVANTAGE meaning Pitt often wearing 1.4"-1.5" heeled dress boots will often have an advantage over others who were around 1" shoes making Pitt look as though he's 1 cm taller than he otherwise would in comparison. 0.5" shoes aren't typical outside of stuff like sandals. Converse are among the thinnest popular shoes and even they add 0.6". When Rob commented on that comparison, he assumed roughly 1" shoes as well since he said Englund would be appearing as more a 5'10.5" man compared to a barefoot Arnold. Of course, that's because he lists Englund at 5'9.5" peak, though I don't think Englund was ever taller than 5'9", but the point remains. 1" sneakers are much more common than 0.5".

Tonyx: I highly doubt either Pitt or Clooney have lifts there. Clooney did apparently wear lifts at times when he was with Stacy Keibler, but I don't know about before or since. Clooney does have thick motorcycle boots, but ones that might add 1.5". Pitt on the other hand looks to have less than 1" shoes, imo.

@Slim: That is an interesting pic as it seems to confirm what most of us thought - that Willis was taller than Pitt in the film - and as you'll recall, Pitt had a footwear advantage. Bruce was almost certainly a strong 5'11" or 5'11" and change guy in his prime, imo. Pitt falling more into that weak 5'11" or even 5'10.5" range makes more sense with Bruce, imo.
Johan said on 13/Sep/17
Yeah near Steven Yeun there you wouldn't think twice about him being 6'0" if he was a less wellknown actor. He really can look a 6 footer at times because of footwear/good posture .
Slim said on 13/Sep/17
Brad pitt and Barry Levinson on sleepers, 1996:
Not sure about footwear though.

@Pierre, don't poke the bear.
Hijopotamus said on 13/Sep/17
Rob, Pitt? Normal shoes? I don't think so!

@anon176, I always said I was 182 but at night I recently measured myself 181 but in the mornings I'm 183 and believe me I never say I'm 6ft. My gf is 5'9" as some upgraders claim for Gwyneth Paltrow and this is why I'm so sure Pitt is nowhere my height. I have to many pics with my gf both barefoot and not a single one she is even close to my height no matter how my head is tilting or my posture. This is why I insisted so much with those pics.
Editor Rob: Pitt at that event looked like he was wearing pretty Standard shoes....

Click Here

Rather normal shoes with no room for any noticeable lift...he's baffling.
Pierre said on 12/Sep/17
@Tonyx=Georges wasn't shorter than Brad imo and was probably a little taller than him(maybe not this last years).Georges had only advantageous external heel imo ,Brad in his beige shoes at the Venise event had probably advantageous shoes,which were looking very high over the external heels Click Here Click Here =try to guess at what height are his ankles to the minimum with this shoes=the logical is that the ankles are a little higher than this shoes with this type of shoes if not= good bye the comfort imo!But his shoes are looking more discreet than classic shoes like Georges because they have only a little external heel this time.You can see in lots of pictures the height of Georges is always ~the same.He wear only shoes with comfortable heels like 1.25 or 1.5 inches imo.And less than 2 inches here imo.
Rich simons said on 12/Sep/17
Well, you can't say he is 5'11 after seeing him with guys like Matt Damon, George Clooney and Jonah Hill

5'10-5'10.5 maybe, but not 5'11 that's for sure
Editor Rob: Brad is a tall guy

Like Clooney says, it's bloody annoying 😅 Especially when Pitt is in normal shoes and Giancarlo is in a little cowboy 🤠 heel...
Pierre said on 12/Sep/17
@Slim say on 10/Sep/17 and 11 /Sep/17="Interesting shot on 12 monkeys""Brad and David Bowie" =less interesting than mine imo.
anon176 said on 12/Sep/17
I wonder how tall Hijopotamus is .
Pierre said on 12/Sep/17
@Rising to @ Arch on 10/Sept/17="A man who has OFTEN 1 cm footwear":)=the other day in Arnold's page you corrected me when i wrote Robert Englund had very probably only 0.5 inch advantage in his flat sneakers on Arnold barefoot,you wrote" flat sneakers are 1 inch not 0.5".Your opinion on sneakers is changing since the other day,then i must finally conclude you agree with me Rising :)
Hijopotamus said on 12/Sep/17
@rising, what do you mean by:
" Imo, a 179 guy who often has a 1 cm footwear and 1 cm posture advantage, sometimes up to 2 cm in either category and naturally, can look 182 at times"

1cm posture advantage???? Dude, that posture advantage means the people around him loose a 1 cm because of their bad posture and not that Pitt GAINS 1 can!
You are hilarious....
Ok so Pitt is 179 but with his posture he becomes 289?

In any case, a 179 guy with regular shoes reaches the 6ft mark no problem which is not Pitts case.
And also with the custom elevators or massive lifts he wears he would be over 185 and it's not the case.
Pitt is under 5'10 and with all his tricks he can reach 183cm
Pierre said on 11/Sep/17
@Slim=Then we doesn't see the same things in the pictures i posted
@Rising= lol where are your better proofs please?
Anthony said on 11/Sep/17
Do lean guys tend to look shorter?
Anthony said on 11/Sep/17
@marquis what did you mean despite being very lean? I'm sorry I'm a bit of a layman or not a bit, alot lol. Do lean people tend to look shorter?
Marquis said on 11/Sep/17
5'10" guy, and looks it, despite being very lean.
Tonyx said on 11/Sep/17
Original, awesome pictures man, thank you. I agree that Brad is 5ft10in.
John Malkovich is listed at 5ft 11in (180.3 cm) by Rob.

In Venice Pitt wore custom-made loafers with mini-lifts inside and a light weight suit, while Clooney clearly wore boots(with who knows what inside), flared pants/jeans, a heavy suit jacket and was aware of his own posture. George looked only half an inch taller then Brad, while standing straight(yes it depends on the angles and I'm sure we can fins photos where Clooney looks 3in taller then Pitt).
My point is that Brad Pitt is clearly taller then George Clooney and George is taller then Matt Damon.
In my humble opinion:
Brad Pitt is 5ft10in.
George Clooney is 5ft9.25in(Peak was 5ft9.75in in the 1980's).
Matt Damon is 5ft9in flat.
These days Matt Damon and George Clooney still want to look taller and they might wear boots or thick soled dress shoes, stand with military posture closer to the camera, but i haven't seen any new photos of them wearing elevators/lifts. Brad Pitt on the other hand, sleeps in his elevators, goes to the beach in them, takes his kids to school in them, wears them on all the movies sets and you bet your sweet a** he wore them to the 2016 Golden Globes with Ryan Gosling. If you can't see that Pitt was wearing lifts that gave at least 1.5in and had better posture at the 2016 Golden Globes there must be something wrong with you.
George's boots from Venice 1.
Click Here
George's boots from Venice 2.
Click Here
Slim said on 11/Sep/17
Pierre said on 9/Sep/17
A good vertical push of the heels = Click Here Click Here .Georges seem amused in the second picture,i ask me why :)
We've already seen the oceans 13 premiere, throw those pictures out the window, "georges" has not only broken his back but he stands further from the camera and slouches badly.

Try googling "brad pitt Casey Affleck" or "brad pitt guy Ritchie" the guys a magician at looking taller, I wouldent be surprised if he visited this site tbh.
Slim said on 11/Sep/17
Click Here

Brad and David Bowie talking backstage at the second annual Audi and conde Nast never follow campaign on 3rd of may 2004 in NYC.
Rising - 174 cm said on 10/Sep/17
Hijopotamus: I see roughly 3" there. Difficult to say due to not knowing how much extra hair Bana has and the high angle, but roughly 3" give or take. And one pic has nothing to do with the other, but in the barefoot pic with Paltrow, as I've said, it's necessarily impossible to judge the exact height difference as measured by the top of their head, but based on eye level, it looked about 2 cm apart. I'm tired of talking about that dodgy pic. I think I even drew lines to prove Pitt's eyes are higher so how is that unbelievable? As for your next pic, using exceptionally dodgy pics that are advantageous to Pitt and thus show a varying height do not prove lifts. Pitt's height does genuinely vary enough to warrant suspicion, but not nearly as much as dodgy pics can make it seem.

@Salty: He's never as tall as Bernthal in that video. Tell me the time in the video you're referring to and I'll take a still to prove my point. This is a decent pic showing Bernthal taller: Click Here Here's another: Click Here neither standing their tallest, but Bernthal is taller by a clear enough margin that Pitt won't lose enough in posture to make up for that. Pitt is shorter in almost every pic from that event and more importantly, shorter on the video. Pitt was shorter at this event as well: Click Here And at the latter event, Pitt looked nothing over 5'10.5" compared to Rob's listings for Logan Lerman and Shia Labeouf at 5'7.5" and 5'8.75", respectively. I'm not claiming there's a big difference between the two. I just think there's sufficient evidence Bernthal edges Pitt by 1/4" to 1/2".

@Pierre: No. I posted FIVE pics, all better than the Pitt/Paltrow ones and I've at least provided evidence of her being closer to her 5'9"-5'9.5" listing than 5'8" or the ridiculous 5'7" you pull out of nowhere. 5'9" is a joke. I showed Pitt looking at least 3" taller than Anthony Hopkins in Meet joe Black and Hopkins actually was 5'9" peak and maybe 5'8.5" at 59 years old. Here's Pitt and another 5'9" man Mel Gibson: Click Here Looks about a 2" difference, no? Certainly 1.5" at the very least as you can see Mel literally looks up to Pitt when he walks over to him and as far as footwear is concerned, both are in boots, but as far as we can tell, Mel's cowboy boots give him the advantage: Click Here Pitt's type of boot would typically add 1.2"-1.3" and cowboy boots will add 1.6"-1.7". As for lifts, it's possible, but if anything, it's more likely Gibson would have the lifts. So we should assume either both or neither have lifts making them negligible. Here's a few stills: Click Here This explodes the ad hominem fanboy accusations as I'm actually a huge fan of Mel while I like Pitt to some extent but wouldn't really call myself a fan yet I've argued much more that Gibson needs a half inch downgrade than Pitt. It also shows that while I respect him and think he does an outstanding job overall, I disagree with Rob sometimes myself as I think both Gibson and Pitt are listed a bit too high, but even with my 5'9" flat estimate for Gibson, I do have to admit Pitt looks a full 5'11" here, especially factoring in footwear. And on the subject of Pitt and 5'9" men, look at even a young, pre-A-list shorter looking Pitt and 5'9"-5'9.5" Rick Schroder: Click Here I'll be the first to argue Pitt doesn't look 5'11" in that film, but he does look about 1" taller than Schroder.

@Arch: I agree with you. Pitt has pulled off that strong 5'11" or weak 6 foot range quite regularly the last 20 years. There are the odd exceptions where he struggles with even 5'10.5", but they're not as often as the occasions he looks his claim or taller. Imo, a 179 guy who often has a 1 cm footwear and 1 cm posture advantage, sometimes up to 2 cm in either category and naturally, can look 182 at times. I could easily see 5'10.75" for Pitt, though I hesitate to go higher.
Slim said on 10/Sep/17
Interesting shot from 12 monkeys.....
Click Here
Dmeyer said on 10/Sep/17
With dano i see 3cm but Pitt has about 1cm more shoes
Perri said on 10/Sep/17
Dear Rob what do you think about Brad Pitt height next to Alex Wurz (6ft 1.25in or 186cm)? Here's a picture in racing shoes Click Here and a picture in normal shoes Click Here According to this photos I think Brad is 5ft 9.25in or 176cm barefoot and 5ft 11in or 180cm with shoes on. I hope you can reply.
Editor Rob: Wurz does claim 187cm, I've not seen enough side by side of them to tell exact difference.
Arch Stanton said on 10/Sep/17
If Pitt measured 5'10.5 on the stat at his low I wouldn't be surprised but if he measured 5'10 or under I would be!! In fairness Pitt is a guy who can pull off 181-2 far more than he looks 179 or lower.
Peter181cm said on 10/Sep/17
He was 1.79m or 5'10.5 at the top!!
Now he look like 1.78m or 5'10 ;)
I never see him more than 1.79 :/
Hijopotamus said on 10/Sep/17
@leo, and take into account Pitt is wearing some kind of trick to boost his height. I mean, he even wears lifts in the beach!
Pierre said on 9/Sep/17
A good vertical push of the heels = Click Here Click Here .Georges seem amused in the second picture,i ask me why :)
Pierre said on 9/Sep/17
Click Here =Try to guess who can have the most advantageous shoes here(you can click zoom mode).a litte clue=the most advantageous shoes can look more vertical and higher than the others shoes to give a vertical push to your heels
Original said on 9/Sep/17
Peak at 5'9 and 3/4 to 5'10 and with lifts 5'10 3/4, megalifts and he looks 6'0 to 6'1. Point. Now he could be. He is almost 54.

Here is Venice with Tilda Swinton (imo about 5'9.75", but listed here as 5'10) around 6'1.5" to 6'2 in the pic, Joel Coen listed as 6' in IMDb and 6'1 in shoes and BP in Venice looks about 5'10.5" to 5'11 w/ shoes (Clooney about 5'11.25 imo) and that is the shorter Pitt ever probably barefoot.

Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

He does not look 4' inches shorter than Tilda, but around 3' inches imo.

And Tilda does looks 6'1.5" - 6'2" with her 4' heels, just look at Edward Norton (6'1 in shoes) and Bruce Willis probably 5'11.75 in shoes.

Click Here

And looks with even with 2.5" to 3" heels she is still of almost the same height of Norton (6'1 w/ shoes) and taller than Ralph Fiennes (6' w/ shoes, listed as 5'11),

but with Hollywood Pitt she looks shorter.

Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

More other example John Malkovich (listed as 5'11.5", imo about 5'11.25" probably 6'0 in shoes) with Tilda and BP, BP seems to be the bigger guy

Click Here

Click Here

So with all these photos there is two facts: 1) Pitt uses big lifts 2) Pitt could pass for strong 6'/6'1 in them. Conclusion: I don't think he is a flat 5'9 guy. Maybe he is a 5'10 guy.
Hijopotamus said on 9/Sep/17
@Rob, LOL
Tonyx said on 9/Sep/17
Rising - 174 cm, Pitt is wearing lifts in his boots in that picture u posted. And a hat.
Leo said on 8/Sep/17
Paul Dano(184cm)looks 5cm taller than Pitt to me.
Click Here
Salty said on 8/Sep/17
@Rising he looks 5'11ish there to me. On the timecode you linked they're both standing very loose, but if you fast forward a bit when they're both standing straight he appears taller than Berthnal.
Pierre said on 8/Sep/17
@Rising=Brad with a cap can have lifts too...
Slim said on 8/Sep/17
Willes188 said on 6/Sep/17
Well, Norton could be 6ft 0.25-6'0.5 he looks well over 6ft flat, I always see him as a strong 6fter. He is 2-3cm taller than Pitt
generous, but kinda reasonable.
Slim said on 8/Sep/17
Hi rob, I hope you're well.

Where do you think brad would stadiometre these days?

A: 5'10"
B: 5'10.5"
C: 5'11"
D: 5'11.5"
Editor Rob: if he only measured 5ft-10.5, I would be as surprised as a Dog with his first porcupine.
Hijopotamus said on 8/Sep/17
@rising, please have a look at this.

Click Here

if the pics of Brad and Gwyneth you see Pitt a few cm taller than her (unbelievable) how many inches do you see in here??? If I see no difference with Paltrow in those nude pics and in this pic I see 3 inches then you should see at least 4, right??? I mean if you were coherent...
Rising - 174 cm said on 7/Sep/17
Pitt did look relatively short at that Berlin photocall -- no more than 5'10" -- but it's funny how he almost always wears a hat when he leaves his heels at home. It's as though he can sometimes go without one, but is not willing to take the chance of appearing without both. This is true of the Venice Film Festival with Clooney and here with Bernthal: Click Here
Pierre said on 7/Sep/17
@Rising=this picture is very bad to gauge height.And 5"9' is only a number on a paper,she can be 5"8' or 5"7' too.Brad 5"9' is a joke?He's maybe more 5"9' than the 5"10.5' or 5"11' you seem to claim.The pictures i post recently are showing Brad in the same range height as Gwyneth in sneakers (01/sept/17).
Tonyx said on 7/Sep/17
Christoph Waltz listed by Rob at 5ft 7in (170.2 cm).
Average Guess (11 Votes) is 5ft 6.59in (169.1cm).
I think Brad Pitt is 5ft10in.
Slim said on 7/Sep/17
Willes188 said on 6/Sep/17
Well, Norton could be 6ft 0.25-6'0.5 he looks well over 6ft flat, I always see him as a strong 6fter. He is 2-3cm taller than Pitt
Buddy, pitt can look 180-185 with his shoe and running close to the camera but I wouldent argue above 5'10.7"
After watching se7en and fight club I was convinced brad was 181 range, but he can only look it in lifts as seen next to Eric bana.

He looks 5'11"-6' next to Jonah hill above, only achieved with lifts.
Slim said on 7/Sep/17
Hijopotamus said on 6/Sep/17
Click Here

How tall is Waltz?

5'7" max omg
Waltz is 5'6.5", give or take a quarter inch.
Hijopotamus said on 6/Sep/17
Click Here

How tall is Waltz?

5'7" max omg
Rising - 174 cm said on 6/Sep/17
@Pierre: Problem is Sly was 5'8.5" minimum in 2013. He's still 5'8" minimum, not max. Since you worship at the altar of barefoot pics, here's 5 of Sly and his 5'9"-5'9.5" listed wife from 2013(the same year the Liotta pic) was taken: Click Here I thought Pitt might have lifts there, I don't know(and neither do you), but Liotta only has 2 cm max shoes, so lifts are not the only reason for footwear advantages. Even if Pitt has normal range 3 cm footwear, that would account for it.

@Truth: You must have chosen your name ironically. I'm the first to point out Pitt's early film appearance as a reason he's not a full 5'11". I'll watch LotF again when I have time, but I seriously doubt they're the same height.

The Pitt at 5'9" stuff is pathetic. You can see Pitt with 5'9" men and it's obvious he's taller. Even the shorter looking younger Pitt still had an inch on Rick Schroder.
Slim said on 6/Sep/17
Rob, please add "you may be interested" on Pitts page,
Willes188 said on 6/Sep/17
Well, Norton could be 6ft 0.25-6'0.5 he looks well over 6ft flat, I always see him as a strong 6fter. He is 2-3cm taller than Pitt
Slim said on 6/Sep/17
Hijopotamus said on 4/Sep/17
Slim, Pitt with his lifts and thick shoes he wore in Fight Club he pretty much reached Nortons terrible posture height. If Pitt was 5'11" and with his military posture he woulda been taller than Sloucher Norton.
Remember when in cowboy boots he was shorter than Sheena Easton in flats. That would only be possible if you are under 5'10.

Interesting they had Geena at 6'1.5 (187 cm) so to make believable 5'11" but Genna is 183 at her peak.

Click Here
Throw that website out the window, anyone can edit celeb heights on there much as imdb.
Dillinger said on 5/Sep/17
Yeah, Rising, keep going.
Brad is lucky if he touches 5'11 just out of bed.
Slim said on 5/Sep/17
Hi rob, if you don't mind sharing, what are the top 3 most common guesses?
Editor Rob: 5ft 10.5-11 is very common for Pitt.
Truth said on 4/Sep/17
Pitt in LotF was same height as Hopkins & was towering him in Meet Joe Black. Rising would claim Pitt had a late growth spurt or maybe the California sun stretched out his limbs... lol

Also, don't forget the promo pics where he's the same height as Christoph Waltz. One of those rare days where he forgot to wear megalifts.

Those claiming 5'7 for Pitt are clearly deluded. Those claiming 5'11 are equally deluded. Pitt is 5'9.75 in the morning barefoot and that's the plain Truth.
Original said on 4/Sep/17
Edward Norton is a legit 6'0 imo means that there is no way BP is less than 5'9.5". I think he is 5'9.5" to 5'10.
Pierre said on 4/Sep/17
@Rising=Comparison Brad /ray Liotta on 03/Sep/17=Shoes make the difference=Ray Liotta and 5"8' max Sylvester=Click Here =Sylvester is looking just a good inch shorter than Ray.Brad seem to have lifts in his white shoes which are looking clearly higher than Ray's shoes, even with this shoes he look max the same height as Ray at the peak of their heads in your picture
Pierre said on 4/Sep/17
See the pictures i posted on 01/sept/2017
Hijopotamus said on 4/Sep/17
Slim, Pitt with his lifts and thick shoes he wore in Fight Club he pretty much reached Nortons terrible posture height. If Pitt was 5'11" and with his military posture he woulda been taller than Sloucher Norton.
Remember when in cowboy boots he was shorter than Sheena Easton in flats. That would only be possible if you are under 5'10.

Interesting they had Geena at 6'1.5 (187 cm) so to make believable 5'11" but Genna is 183 at her peak.

Click Here
Slim said on 4/Sep/17
Willes188 said on 3/Sep/17
Rob is spot on like almost always 5'11.75 out of bed and 5'10.75-5'11 at his absolute lowest
Sorry buddy, its most likely pitts 5'10"range, in fight club he wore about 2 in of shoe(Timberlands/dr martens which look ugly af) and he stuffed a 1 inch lift in them to look the same height As Edward Norton....
It wouldn't surprise me if those 2 guys were 2 inches apart....
Rising - 174 cm said on 3/Sep/17
Back in 2012, Pitt could look as tall as Ray Liotta: Click Here Of course, Liotta is a sloucher and was wearing 0.7" max type shoes while Pitt's shoes have enough of a heel to be in the 1" range: Click Here Click Here I'd say Liotta is closer to 5'11" these days. I'm not quite sure about when he was 57, but I wouldn't think the full 5'11.5" still as he was looking shorter the following year. He could easily have still been 181 cm, though, in which case you see Pitt with maybe a 1 cm footwear advantage and a bit better posture can also look that tall.
Slim said on 3/Sep/17
Joshua said on 2/Sep/17
He looks more than 5'11!!

Don't be fooled buddy, he does admire his thick shoes.
Willes188 said on 3/Sep/17
Rob is spot on like almost always 5'11.75 out of bed and 5'10.75-5'11 at his absolute lowest
Slim said on 2/Sep/17
When norton corrected his terrible posture....
Click Here
Rising - 174 cm said on 2/Sep/17
@Hijopotamus: Actually, that IS a problem with determining lifts for someone who wears cowboy boots a lot. I've brought up that very problem with someone like Mel Gibson who wears cowboy boots a lot. Pitt is actually somewhat similar in that he wears boots all the time himself so his ankle will be more concealed, which makes it more difficult to tell. That's why I want to stress again, I'm not claiming absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Only that something needs to be proven before it can be assumed. Socks however, have nothing to do with the point. I'm talking about unusually high ankles. The ankle bone is often visible as well. Socks don't smooth over an ankle bone as though they're spackle. But that's the clearest way to spot lifts short of recognizing a shoe as an elevator shoe. But in the Stallone case, those sneakers are Hogan sneakers and not technically elevator shoes, but he does supplement them with lifts as we can see from the unusually high ankle: Click Here He gets a 2.5"-2.7" boost total in all likelihood from those, but no off the rack men's sneaker like that -- even one priced at a few hundred $ -- will give you that much. Robert Downey Jr. similar usually wears even more expensive designer sneakers, but I've found some of the models and outside of the odd pair of wedge sneakers, most don't come with lifts -- he puts in his own lifts. Although RDJ wears high tops, which can serve the same purpose as boots in concealing more, except in Downey's case since he hides it so poorly you can a bulge in his sneakers nobody could ever argue about and to his credit, he doesn't try to deny.
Joshua said on 2/Sep/17
He looks more than 5'11!!
Rising - 174 cm said on 1/Sep/17
I'm glad Meet Joe Black was mentioned because that's a film Pitt looks surprisingly tall in. I thought he could look 3" taller than Anthony Hopkins. Here's a photo taken on set where footwear is visible: Click Here

I use to think Hopkins was about 5'8", maybe 5'8.5" peak, especially because of this film. But then I go back and watch The Bounty again from 1984, this time with more of an eye on height and see Hopkins in early middle age at least as tall as a 5'9" Mel Gibson and clear as day, the two men face to face with Hopkins looking down at Gibson! Then I see Hopkins in his late 70's still looking pretty much 5'8" or close to it and no shorter than a 5'8" Mark Wahlberg except for when Marky Mark is getting a 1.5" boost from his Timberlands. So while reserving the right to change my mind once I have a chance to go back and watch more 70s and 80s films, it'd seem reasonable to conclude that if Hopkins was a full 5'9" peak and is still near 5'8" at 79 years old, then he'd be at least 5'8.5" when he filmed Meet Joe Black at 59 years old. In fact, even losing 2 cm tops going from 174 to 172 minimum in 20 years isn't bad at all. Pitt really did make a pretty average man look short and did so with footwear that on the surface, doesn't look out of the ordinary. Whether Pitt has a lift inside and is getting a 2" boost, I can't say.
Pierre said on 1/Sep/17
Click Here Click Here
Rising - 174 cm said on 1/Sep/17
@Filippo: Yes, because Brad is so obsessed with height that he hires people who contradict his own height claims.

@Hijopotamus: Thank you for finally obliging. What am I "finished" doing? Certainly not posting on this site. I'll continue to do that for the foreseeable future. Brad's sneakers look a bit funny there, but inconclusive. RDJ is a clear example of a bulge in sneakers. I can use Mel Gibson as an example again as well to show the difference between what a pair of sneakers will look with and without lifts. I've never denied the possibility of Pitt wearing lifts and I don't deny the possibility there, but if you look at how they look funny in that first pic and then scroll down to the last full size pic below the thumbnails, in that pic, I could pretty easily imagine Pitt's feet being flat in those sneakers, so again, inconclusive. I don't know what's funny about me agreeing Pitt isn't a full 5'11". I'm not hoping to prove or disprove that with our side argument. I'm merely questioning one of the common assumptions made and questioning whether the assumption is justified. Btw, even if you could prove Pitt put insert lifts in sneakers, it doesn't follow that he'd necessarily do it with 1.5" heels as the heels would already give a comparable amount of height to normal sneakers with a typical lift.

@anon176: That's fine. All I can do is post the images, say what I think and people will view them with their own eyes, but I see a clear case of their ankles being higher than they would be in the absence of an extra lift inside those boots. The only difference between Douglas and Gibson compared to Cruise and Stallone is the former are wearing boots which conceal more so it's less noticeable. I'm more limited when it comes to Douglas since that appearance was from 1992 so there's not as many photos, but the ankle bone is at the top of the boot: Click Here Look at the bend in the Gibson pic from my previous post. The usual part of the leg which would be there doesn't bend at that type of angle and if you think of the boot if it had a normal sole, his foot would have to be abnormally long to reach. Then at the foot on the ground, you can not only see a high ankle bone, but you can also see an angle that wouldn't be there if the foot were actually flat, but one you would see if you went up on your toes slightly. You can see this in Gibson's 2000 appearances on the Tonight Show as well and in one of them, he's wearing the same boots. In Douglas' case, I know Rob said he thought there was a good chance I was right, but if you don't see it then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Hijopotamus said on 1/Sep/17
If someone hides big lifts on his cowboy boots nobody can say that person is wearing lifts looool

...because nobody can see the ankle.

Hey, can you guys see the ankle if someone is wearing socks?
Slim said on 1/Sep/17
Hi rob, you say 179 is the lowest brad would potentially measure, what what be the highest? We promise we won't judge your opinion.
Editor Rob: out of bed I wouldn't be surprised if he made 5ft 11.75 range, but by afternoon I still think he drops to around the 5ft 11 mark.
Slim said on 31/Aug/17
Hijopotamus said on 31/Aug/17
Click Here

If those aren't lifts then Brad has elephant feet

@rising, you are finished dude, and the funny thing is that you agree he is not 5'11
Rising has pegged brad at 179 range as far as I know,
No he is not "finished", he's actually helping you find a way to find brad pitts lifts, Still no ankle shots=no lifts.
anon176 said on 31/Aug/17
Sorry "Rising - 174 cm" but I fail to see Douglas/Gibson in lifts there.
Hijopotamus said on 31/Aug/17
Click Here

If those aren't lifts then Brad has elephant feet

@rising, you are finished dude, and the funny thing is that you agree he is not 5'11
CDS said on 30/Aug/17
I first noticed Brad's "heightening" in the trailer for "Meet Joe Black" in 1998 (although like many have said on here, it probably started sooner). Pitt is standing next to screen legend, Anthony Hopkins, looking about a half head taller, and I remember their previous film together, "Legends of the Fall", and thinking to myself, was he THAT much taller than him?? But this is a flat surface, and of course in that earlier film, a lot of it was outdoors, on rugged, uneven terrain, etc.. Well, anyway, jump ahead a few years, one morning I happen to be watching that earlier film LOTF on TBS or whatever, and I see another shot of Pitt and Hopkins facing each other, and they are almost dead even! LOL FTR Rob, all the evidence I'm seeing between the past and future Pitt, is that he's no more than around 5'9.75" barefeet, end of day height. Which of course is close to 5'11" in shoes, but with his "special" shoes he wears, he easily passes 6 foot.
Brad said on 30/Aug/17
"He's tall, he's like 6' 1", it's irritating". George builds up his own height with Brad fibbing. Brad is 5' 10". I saw him from way away In Palm Springs in monster dress boots that had to be ramped 3" with heel and wedge in the images from the red carpet. The guy likes to be a 6 foot or above much like Burt and Sly. Which is his coolest doo? Troy? The Mexican? Fight Club? He looks uncool in short doo.
Truth said on 30/Aug/17
Pitt always has impeccable posture. He also knows every trick in the book. There is that scene in Moneyball where he is seated in the empty stadium with his legs stretched long. Thanks to his lifts resting on the top of the seats 3 rows below him, his legs look like they're longer than a stretched limo lol
Gotta give him credit though. For a celeb like him to be able to pull this off, it must have taken incredible dedication. Wearing lifts 24/7 for the past 3 decades, even when at the beach. That's just insane. Guess one day, he'll come out with the big reveal but it'll probably be at the end of his career or when he's really old and doesn't give a damn anymore.
Filippo said on 30/Aug/17
lol! Rising saga continues.
We'll soon discover that he has been hired in braddy's PR team!
Rising - 174 cm said on 30/Aug/17
@Hijopotamus: Still dodging my question AND missing my point entirely.

1.Pick ONE pic and state whatever reason you think it proves Pitt is wearing lifts in that one pic.
2.If that's the case, then by your own admission, Pitt's adroitness makes it impossible to PROVE he's wearing lifts.

However, that just doesn't withstand scrutiny given how many public appearances Pitt has made.

Consider, we could find Michael Douglas with a lift in his boot: Click Here
Mel Gibson with one in his: Click Here
Sly Stallone with a lift in his sneakers: Click Here
And Tom Cruise revealed wearing elevators: Click Here

Note how high the ankle is in all the photos. Why can we see these men wearing lifts, but not Pitt? That's secondary, though. Like I said, rather than lazily making me look through and analyze a dozen photos, I want you to pick ONE and point out the signs of lifts. It doesn't even have to be the high ankle. It could be a bulge, the shape of the shoe or anything that made you think Pitt wore lifts.
Slim183 said on 30/Aug/17
Hijopotamus said on 30/Aug/17
@rising, it's not my fault if you don't click on the links I posted. Anyone with a single brain cell can look at the pics where he's wearing trainers packed with lifts. Of course you cannot see the ankle! Thats WHY he wears them, hello!

It's still a rumour unless you convince us(his ankle exposed at a party/event.)


Loving how Clooney guesses a 5ft10 range guy at 6ft1in, just goes to show that everyone in Hollywood blows up their height and causes others to have a warped perception.
Slim183 said on 30/Aug/17
Tonyx said on 29/Aug/17
Guys, how big of a lift do you think Brad puts in his thin soled sneakers? My guess is 1in

1.25 maybe, the guys got a build for lifts, short legs with long arms and torso, it's why the lifts make his legs look long and no one notices it, wether as vin diesels quite the opposite and looks ridiculous with lifts.
Hijopotamus said on 30/Aug/17
@rising, it's not my fault if you don't click on the links I posted. Anyone with a single brain cell can look at the pics where he's wearing trainers packed with lifts. Of course you cannot see the ankle! Thats WHY he wears them, hello!
Pierre said on 30/Aug/17
@Rising= /Click Here = look this video with stop mode from 0:53 to 0:57.You can see the shoes and the floor at around 0:23
Rising - 174 cm said on 29/Aug/17
@Hijopotamus: I can't help you do all your thinking for you. I never said Pitt didn't wear lifts since I explicitly said I suspect he has and I said there's no proof yet. The best way to prove it would be to catch Pitt's ankle looking abnormally high when he sits. But pick whatever criteria you want. Just pick ONE picture of your own that you think PROVES Pitt is wearing lifts and explain why. I'll reserve judgement until you do. I really do want to see some sort of proof so we can put this to rest.

But Pitt typically wears a dress boot as opposed to a low cut dress shoe, which is more than enough to hide a half inch to inch lift, if he were so inclined. I myself think it's more like 1.5" heels most of the time, but there could be a reason for almost always wearing some sort of boot.

As for Gosling, he looks about 2 cm taller to me with about 1 cm less footwear: Click Here But Pitt also has better posture. In the video, Gosling looked about an inch taller to me: Click Here
Tonyx said on 29/Aug/17
Guys, how big of a lift do you think Brad puts in his thin soled sneakers? My guess is 1in.
Slim said on 29/Aug/17
Dmeyer said on 28/Aug/17
À good example is with Gosling je Can look 5 FT 11,25-11,5 and when you look attitude All pics you Can see Brad à solid heel 1,4in type but its à low cut shoes , he has to be near 5'11

You're forgetting when he wore his dr martens/timberlands in fight club, yet he looked the same height as Edward norton.... I think brads 179, it would explain the perfect 2 inch difference between Jason statham.
Pierre said on 29/Aug/17
@Slim="Gwyneth 5"9' is good" isn't an argument
Slim said on 28/Aug/17
Pierre, your video won't play, says it's unavailable.
Hijopotamus said on 28/Aug/17
@rising, are you trolling or just being funny? So if you cannot see the ankle, there's no proof he is wearing lifts? looooool
Pierre said on 28/Aug/17
@Slim ...yes,then you have not see my comments pictures and video on 09 and 10 august
Dmeyer said on 28/Aug/17
À good example is with Gosling je Can look 5 FT 11,25-11,5 and when you look attitude All pics you Can see Brad à solid heel 1,4in type but its à low cut shoes , he has to be near 5'11
Lol said on 28/Aug/17
Rob is 1.80 out of bed for him? Cuz he is not taller than 1.78.1 in the evening and I'm very sure in this. Dunno why
Rising - 174 cm said on 28/Aug/17
@Filippo: No. You're a liar or your reading comprehension is as poor as your logic. I just said once again I don't think Pitt is 5'11" and I said 5'8.5"-5'9" for Paltrow or a weak 5'9". Who is "everyone"? You and Hijopotamus? Though at least he can read well enough to see I said Pitt was under 5'11". Are you going to continue making a fool of yourself with this immature trolling routine?

@Hijopotamus: In not one of them is Pitt's ankle visible so we can conclusively judge. Pic one pic and tell me the signs you think point to lifts. I actually disagree with DMeyer because I do think Pitt has probably worn lifts on occasions, but until you can show me too high of an ankle or a specific cut of an elevator shoe, I will continue saying there's no proof.
Slim said on 28/Aug/17
Rob, any theories as to why brad wouldent claim 6'?
Editor Rob: I've not heard him say his height for ages. Clooney has mentioned his height more than Pitt.
Filippo said on 28/Aug/17
Ahaha rising, you called Paltrow 5'9er and Pitt 5'11er accused me of not replying? You are making a fool of yourself, mate, despite the fact that everyone is desperately trying to bring you back to reality.
But, I mean, that's ok for me. Buy whatever you like the most.
Slim said on 28/Aug/17
Click Here

Looks the average user guess here tbh, not sure how tall hanks was around 2013.
Editor Rob: I'm not sure how much difference there would be, but sometimes catching people in movement and camera tilt/position/lens distortion will swing heights, look at This one to see Brad taller.
Slim said on 27/Aug/17
Pierre, I opened all those links, the Tarantino pics should be thrown out the window cause he slouches 24/7 and pitt looks 179 in the Paltrow pic, look at the top of their head not their eye level. Imo Gwyneth listing is fine, no need for a downgrade, Pitt on the other hand, maybe.

Hippo, if you want, hit us up with clips from "spy game" where pitt looks shorter than this listing or proof of lifts, we know he's a Cuban heel lover, but no proof of lifts, otherwise the title of this page would say "brad pitt real height without lifts".
Anonymous said on 27/Aug/17
Brad Pitt and Prince Charles(5ft10)
Click Here
Click Here
Dmeyer said on 27/Aug/17
Brad Can look à solid 180cm Guy even when wearing shoes with low cut and no room for lifts
Dmeyer said on 27/Aug/17
Call me crazy but i think Brad dosnt wear lifts not even 0,5in , but his footwear Can vary 0,6in up to 1,4in and on rare occasion 1,6-2in
Rising - 174 cm said on 27/Aug/17
@Hijopotamus: Post a link to her saying she's 5'8". I haven't seen it and apparently Rob hasn't either. I've seen the video with Corden and Gwyneth looks slightly taller to me so I'd guess her 5'8.5"-5'9" range or a weak 5'9". Yes, I've said repeatedly I don't think Pitt is a full 5'11" so we agree on that, but that's nothing new. I don't agree that they're the same height at all, even in that pic that's cutoff, his eye level is about 2 cm higher, but he's lowering his head and naturally, eye level. How much the difference would be, I can't say. I believe Pitt is 5'10.5" looking at everything. He looked about 1" taller than Rick Schroder in Across the Tracks.

@Pierre: Pictures with and without shoes can both be deceptive, but it's unrealistic to think you can only judge somebody like Pitt when they don't have shoes. He's almost never photographed barefoot. You have to rely on voyeuristic tabloid photos taken at a distance to even see him barefoot.
Hijopotamus said on 27/Aug/17
Click Here

@rising, you say there's no proof Pitt wears lifts?

Guys, in Spy Game he was barely taller than Redford but look at the massive Cuban heels he sported.
Other pics with trainers are too much evidence.
Pierre said on 26/Aug/17
@ Around 5"11'/6"0' Slim say to Rising on 25/Aug/17=this page has gone way downhill...Then lets change of discussion Slim=i think all pictures with shoes are only pictures with shoes,shoes can make a big difference even when you don't suspect them(comments 09 and 10 August with pictures and video).What do you think about this point of view?
Hijopotamus said on 26/Aug/17
Rising, once again, Gwyneth said she was 5ft8ish and you can see it in that video with James Corden.
I never said you said Pitt in that pic was 3 inches taller. I just meant that he wasnt 3 inches taller as a 5'11 guy should be. So we agree, Pitt is not 5'11"
So if you say Gwyneth is 5'8-5'9 then Pitt is same height and one cm taller.
Jtm said on 26/Aug/17
He's still listed 5'11? Lol
Slim183 said on 26/Aug/17

Brad Pitt: 5'10.5"
David Fincher: 5'11.5"
Edward Norton: 6'0.5"
Original said on 25/Aug/17
I'm ok with ~5'9.5" for Pitt.
Slim183 said on 25/Aug/17
@rising:"This page has gone way downhill since the discussion has become almost solely about one dodgy pic."

Pierre, in that snap of pitt with his dyed blonde hair. He has a 1.5 inch footwear advantage. Pitt being in boots, Gwynn in sandals.
Brad should be getting 5'10.25", 5'10.5" and 5'10.75" guesses, nothing above or below.
Rising - 174 cm said on 24/Aug/17
@Filippo: When you reply to me, but don't reply to anything I actually said, you're acknowledging that you don't have a rebuttal for any of my arguments.

I bring up the pics where Pitt looks shorter than Clooney at Venice '08 more than anyone and elsewhere I've said Clooney was an absolute max of 5'10.5" so this isn't applicable to me.
He looks 5'10" range with Tarantino
Bana is 6'2" and Pitt has not looked over 4" shorter than Bana that I've seen so bad example.
Camera advantages, posture and in the case of outside pics, uneven ground are all common factors in pics that only a fool would disregard. Pics aren't taken for the purpose of height comparisons.
One of your classic strawman attempts. I point out the same flaws in some pics where Pitt looks taller. I just did it when Rampage claimed Pitt looked a strong 6 feet with Claudia Schiffer. I regularly point out Pitt often has a 1-2 cm posture advantage and 1-2 cm footwear advantage and have noted his habit of moving himself closer to the camera. So again, not applicable to me.
Who's a fanboy?
You say Paltrow is 5'8" as though it were some undisputed fact. Both Rob and the average guess have her around 5'9". From what I've seen, she's somewhere from 5'8.5"-5'9", imo.
As far as anyone can see, those are typical 1.3" type hiking boots. I swear, you and some others act like you've never seen a boot before.
When did I ever say he was near 3" taller? I said about 1.5", but keep up the desperate strawman tactics. You haven't even proven he wears lifts either, much less wears them all the time.

Arguing with me would be more effective if you actually addressed things I said. Let's cut to the chase: Do I need to prove that even pics with better angles can exaggerate or minimize differences? Either acknowledge this obvious truth, or if you try in vain to deny it, I already have a perfect example in mind. This page has gone way downhill since the discussion has become almost solely about one dodgy pic.
Slim183 said on 24/Aug/17
Hijopotamus, it's because Pitts probably in 5'10" territory and he's desperate to look a decent 6' in public like vin diesel does. I've been rooting for 5'10.75 for months, but a long torso'd guy like pitt would wake at 6' if he were a weak 5'11", so 5'10.5" pitt from me.
Pierre said on 24/Aug/17
This shoes are looking a little like snow boots.Curious,Gwyneth is in sandals so i suppose the picture was taken around the summer...
Heylo said on 24/Aug/17
I also think that a flat 5'11 is unlikely based on the photos with Paltrow. But he also gets quite tall with lifts so he can't be under 5'10 either. The average guess is pretty telling. I think downgrading him to at least 179.5 cm would be somewhat closer to reality. But then I must say that I don't like sounding too confident. The Paltrow photos aren't perfect by any means even though they might be enough to denounce a full 2 inch difference?

We should compare other people with the same supposed height difference. How does a legit 2 inch difference actually look like? The difference between Guy Pearce and Robert Pattinson for example look bigger to my eyes than with Brad and Gwyneth.
Hijopotamus said on 24/Aug/17
@rising, can't you just face reality? When Pitt looks short beside Clooney, Tarantino, Bana or Gwyneth it means: bad angle, further to the camera, closer to the camera, foot disadvantage, ground disadvantage, stomachache, bending knees etc
If Pitt looks taller it means he is taller.
The fanboy criteria is a joke.
In that pic with G he is standing as straight or even straighter than her. She is 5'8ish.
In that pic in the street where you say G had ground advantage Pitt is wearing massive lifts. Just watch his shoes. Why a 5'11" guy would wear massive lifts if he is close to 3 inches taller than her?? If he was 5'11" with thosexlifts he would reach over 6'1" and would absolutely tower a 5'8" girl in flats.
Slim183 said on 24/Aug/17
Slim183 said on 24/Aug/17
Editor big rob,

how tall do you think brad wakes up at? he's got a lengthy spine, I'd say 0.75 shrinkage from out of bed to early evening.
Editor Rob: on average you might expect about 0.75 inch, but some folk have 0.5, others under 6ft even up to 1.25 shrinkage.

Oh okay, I'm a 183 range guy with the legs of a 192 range guy, thankyou, I assumed everyone else didn't lose much, I will pay more attention to detail now.
Filippo said on 24/Aug/17
@ Rising.
LOL. Ok, man, Pitt is a 6'3 giant and in that pic he was on his knees. Bye.
Slim183 said on 24/Aug/17
Editor big rob,

how tall do you think brad wakes up at? he's got a lengthy spine, I'd say 0.75 shrinkage from out of bed to early evening.
Editor Rob: on average you might expect about 0.75 inch, but some folk have 0.5, others under 6ft even up to 1.25 shrinkage.
cobra said on 24/Aug/17
There's a scene in The Mexican where he stands face to face with JK Simmons. He walks away and comes back to the same position. It's a wide angle shot and you can see most of their upper bodies. They look almost the exact same height.

Simmons is listed at 5-10 and a half on this site.
WeeburaiJones said on 24/Aug/17
He looks about the same height or taller than Claudia Schiffer, even accounting for the difference in shoes, but his posture's a bit better, so I'd guess 5'11.25"
Rising - 174 cm said on 23/Aug/17
@Hijopatamus: I've repeatedly said there's only one decent pic(for comparing height) out of those barefoot pics and stated my opinion on the pic in question ad nauseam so what on earth are you going on about? The fact there's only one decent pic is crucial because single pics, even ones with seemingly better posture and angle than those can be very misleading depending on the lense and position. Rob has demonstrated this numerous times using examples he witnessed at conventions he's attended. He's done so on the Mike Tyson and Carl Weathers pages for instance.

@Filippo: No. In the only one that's even decent enough to consider for comparing height, Pitt has roughly 2 cm going by eye level. But height isn't measured by eye level, it's measured by the top of their head. The problem is, we can't see the difference between the top of their heads as it's out of the frame. Furthermore, it's from a side angle rather than straight on and both have loose posture in different ways. So, Pitt's eyes appear about 2 cm higher than Paltrow's while they stand relaxed(not as tall as they would to get measured). People really must want Pitt to be a certain height to not understand this. I agree Pitt isn't a full 5'11" and if you want to say, he gives too short an impression with her in general to be taller than x then fair enough, but to act like that picture(much less that other useless one) damn near tells us the precise height difference the two is laughable. You don't think a two people say 4 cm apart in height can have their eye level only 2 cm apart in a photo? In fact, two people 4 cm apart in height can and have easily looked only 2 cm apart in overall height and from better angles and with better posture to judge. Differences can always look bigger or smaller than they are in reality in a photo. This is not a difficult concept to grasp nor a shocking revelation. The fact Pitt is still taller in the side by side photo makes it far from this shocking revelatory photo. Had he been shorter or even no taller I'd say it was a bit more significant.

To paraphrase Rob "Those pictures reveal more about how nature intended them than they do their heights."
Johno said on 22/Aug/17
In that comparison with Pitt and Paltrow, although Paltrow is standing behind Pitt, he one foot is on the same plane as Pitt's so she is losing some height there with her one foot forward and her slight neck lean in to Pitt. Whereas Pitt is standing on a tiny deficit however, his boots look to be ~1.3-inches and her sandles 0.9-1-inch.

There appears to be hardly any height between them.
Johno said on 22/Aug/17
@Rising, never seen that picture before of Paltrow and Pitt. Well, what can i say ....
Rising - 174 cm said on 22/Aug/17
This is pretty interesting: Click Here Brad looks to at least have 1.3" type boots while Gwyneth is in sandals, standing behind him and slouching. Brad should look taller than that all things considered, but she looks to be on higher ground. The boots Brad wore to the '96 Oscars can look a bit suspicious as well, at least from this angle: Click Here He could have started wearing lifts or bigger footwear with Gwyneth to look more comfortably taller than her, especially when she wore heels.
Brad said on 22/Aug/17
Brad owns Matt Damon 24/7-365...go to an Ocean's film...he gets owned by George and Brad every scene.
Filippo said on 22/Aug/17
Oh come on, everyone.
The pics (both of them) with Paltrow are very explicative.
We could argue whether they were the very same height, or Pitt being 1 cm taller. 2 cm taller.
The ABSOLUTE max is one inch taller for Pitt, which appears to be a stretch.
So, Paltrow is not even 5'9 (she told to be a strong 5'8).
Anything more than 5'10 flat for Pitt should be out of question, unless you talk with fanboys/fangirls.
Hijopotamus said on 22/Aug/17
@Rising, thats why I addressed you to the other pic, hello!! Been telling you the same thing in 4 different posts. I hope you finally get it.
Rising - 174 cm said on 21/Aug/17
@Hijopotamus: Are YOU serious? The kissing pic is absolutely 110% worthless for comparing height. Two people have to make at least their mouths around the same height to kiss. Did I really have to explain that?
Anonymous said on 21/Aug/17
5' 9"

5' 9"

5' 11"

5' 11"

6' 0"

6' 1"
Slim183 said on 21/Aug/17
I wouldn't argue below 5'10.25.

I'm willing to bet brad would edge Matt Damon or even Harry Styles.

Same deal as Michael Fassbender, I'd give brad weak 5'11.
Hijopotamus said on 20/Aug/17
@tonyx, I fully agree with you. Pitt 5'9.
@Rising, the other pic is both kissing. Dude, are you serious? Can't you just look for the pics yourself?
Pierre said on 20/Aug/17
Brad 176.5 Gwyneth 173 Georges 178
Tonyx said on 19/Aug/17
Hijopotamus, meaning what? Every time i see those barefoot Gwyneth photos with Brad i think he's not even 5ft10.25in but a straight 5ft9in. I'm just trying to be polite here, open minded.
Rising - 174 cm said on 18/Aug/17
@Hijopotamus: I'm asking, where's the OTHER pic to compare them barefoot? I've seen that one and commented on it ad naueseam, but where's the 2nd?

@Pierre: I disagree, Pitt looks to be slouching at least as much to me. But even if they lose about the same height - which is impossible to say - Pitt is still taller in that photo.

As for Claudia, Pitt with at least a 1" footwear advantage and hat is barely taller: Click Here Pitt is standing casually, but he looks to be standing straighter there as well.
Hijopotamus said on 18/Aug/17
Tonyx, I can remind you Gwyneth is 5'8ish
Sorry to be curt...
Tonyx said on 18/Aug/17
Brad Pitts arms and hands are slightly under average in length but when he wears elevators/lifts they look legit short when he is not wearing a tailored suit. He has average shoulders but likes to raise them in a weird way, like if he is in a movie and the camera is over his right shoulder, then he'll raise his left shoulder higher to appear bigger. He likes to keep his hands on his waist while wearing a blazer(high gorge on the lapels, heavily padded shoulders) making him look bigger, like he has wider shoulders and as if he was a bigger man(Inglorious Basterds, The Counselor). Javier Bardem is taller then Michal Fassbender. Michael Fassbender is not shorter then Brad Pitt. Remember at the Inglorious Basterds event when the cast is standing together doing some dance with raising their legs and looking at Pitt and hes not raising his leg. That was funny. They knew he wore lifts. And he knew that they knew. Inglourious Basterds Premiere At Cannes Film Festival (not the tan suit, the black tux).
Used to think he was 6ft tall. Realized he has never been taller then 5ft11in after i came tho this site. Looking at his limbs, he is a 5ft10-5ft10.25in guy. I'd bet money on the fact that in the top right picture, if they took their clothes of(not just shoes), both stood straight, Claudia would be taller. For sure. I mean come on, she's basically standing on her right foot and bending it backwards(i said backwards), while also bending the left leg, arching her back, lowering her eye level, wearing ballet shoes and ofc no padded blazer.

BRAD PITT is 5ft10.25in tall. Small feet(really small). Can look 6ft tall.
5ft10.25in+1.75in custom made elevator dress shoes+Military posture=6ft tall
The important thing to remember, Brad Pitt doesn't wear the same exact pair of shoes to every event, right? So to one event he might have worn 2.25in black dress shoes with roomy black trousers while to another event he could have worn custom made loafers that give 1.5 in but look like regular ones, add the hat. I think these days Brad doesn't get more then 2in from his shoes no matter where he goes. 2009 was a long time ago. Getting 1.5in from average footwear isn't hard, getting 2.25in from dress shoes without them looking suspicious.. well that's the trick isn't it. Brads small feet and roomy trousers allow him to do that.
Remind me please, how tall is Quentin Tarantino in his thins soled shoes and why does Brad Pitt consistently look so much shorter/smaller than him.
Pierre said on 18/Aug/17
In the picture with Claudia we doesn't know the real advantage of Brad's shoes this time again(See my comments /pictures/video on 06 ,09 and 10 August 2017).And Claudia could be 5"10' barefoot by some sources.
Johno said on 17/Aug/17
There don't appear to be more than 1.5-inches between Rob and Samuel Anderson and Samuel in turn looks about 2-2.25-inches taller than James Corden.

It is pretty obvious Rob would have 0.5-0.75-inches on Corden and as i said before, Corden is no more 5'8 or 5'8.25 at his tallest and is definently at least Paltrow's height.
Dmeyer said on 17/Aug/17
Dont forget that Brad with Claudia Can look anywere from same height to 2in taller than Claudia of course when both in equal posture ans angle he Can look just 0,5in taller , she is 5'11-11,25 with her 0,25-3in inch she is 181-181,5cm shoes on he is 182-3cm shoes on if you look well as All pic his shoe heel is less than 1in and nothing indicates he has lifts inside the foot pose seem very normal , that makes him 180-180,5cm barefeet , you could argue à 0,5in lifts that truly Give just 0,3ish and that will make him 5'10,5-10,75 , 177cm guy will need 6cm shoes to look like this , also at very worst on the boat with Clooney Peak barefeet aleast 5'10,5 he look 3cm with in à moccassin that Give max 0,75in if so and the foot pose dosnt indicate lifts wish again makes him 182ish with flat shoes on the Guy has to be 180cm or close to it
Pierre said on 17/Aug/17
@Rising=By considering their postures the loss of height of Brad's shoulder's seem to be insignificant compared to the loss of height of Gwyneth's shoulders
Hijopotamus said on 17/Aug/17
@Rising, that's the pic I said I couldn't see where you see theyr not standing straight and where you see a 2 cm difference.
Rising - 174 cm said on 16/Aug/17
Brad is dropping height in both his head and shoulders. Neither are standing like they would for a measurement because it's a candid photo I believe was taken without their knowledge or consent. I don't think Brad is getting much of a camera advantage because they look in proportion. If he was, his head would look bigger than usual.
even said on 16/Aug/17
180 cm = after a long sleep , 178 cm = after a long day of hard work .
Rising - 174 cm said on 15/Aug/17
@Hijopotamus: That's the ONE pic I was referring to where I said there was a 2 cm difference as best as I could tell. Where's the other one?

@Willes188: This page is for debating heights. It would be strange if there was no disagreement with anything short of the type of measurement Rob does in person. It would also mean a lot less traffic for Rob! I can see why you, Rob and others give Pitt the full 5'11", but there's legitimate reason to believe Pitt is 1/4" or 1/2" shorter than that as well. But he's definitely nothing over 5'11". Pitt wouldn't have rounded down his height. In fact, most who are even the full 5'11" will claim 6', much less those above it and Pitt wouldn't be someone I'd guess to be the rare exception, but that's conjecture.
Pierre said on 15/Aug/17
Picture Brad/Gwyneth(Gwyneth bend her left knee and so bend her pelvis,her head is tilting a little,Brad seem to be very straight only his head is tilting,he's closer to the camera)= Click Here . Picture and video(Toddlerography) Gwyneth and James(see the first 14 seconds with stop mode and look at eventually the bricks of the wall) = Click Here Click Here .Picture strong 5"8.25' Rob(he had 1/4 inch more shoes this day) /Samuel Anderson(Samuel is looking upward= Click Here .Picture James/Samuel(James seem to be on tiptoe in the picture Samuel is looking downward)= Click Here.
Hijopotamus said on 15/Aug/17
Do you guys read what people post?
Check Richard's post and think before replying.
Thank you.
Hijopotamus said on 14/Aug/17
@Rising, scroll down to Richard's post. How can you say "not true" if you seem to be unaware of this pic?
That's a pretty straight posture of Brad, better than Gwyneths and she still looks taller.
Slim 182 cm said on 14/Aug/17
@Rising - 174 cm, he will just deny it.
Slim 182 cm said on 14/Aug/17
Above average, but not tall.
Willes188 said on 13/Aug/17
I am tired of these 5'10 claims, just admit that the guy is 5'11. I can see 5'11.25 over 5'10.75 but in the middle as Rampage said is perfect.
Rising - 174 cm said on 13/Aug/17
Hijopotamus: Not true. They're not even standing straight in the one pic. Where's this other one where they're standing straight? And I said the difference looks 2 cm in that pic. Doesn't mean it is. A pic is not a stadiometer.
HonestSlovene said on 13/Aug/17
5'10.5" is his true height as would explain why sometimes he can look as low as 5'10" flat and other times a strong 5'11" pushing 6'0" range.
Hijopotamus said on 11/Aug/17
@Rising, 2 pics, not one! And standing very very straight (Pitt).
In any case, where do you see 2cm difference? Lets say she is 5'9 at the very most (not even her claimed 5'9) so Brad wouldn't reach 5'10" even with that 2cm difference you claim.
Thank you for finally agreeing.
Pitt barely 5'10" being generous.
...end of.
MarcusTheSwede said on 11/Aug/17
Brad Pitt isnt over 177cm he is at best 177cm But wears huge soles and lift inside you can see if you just Google Brad Pitt heel shoes and if you look at the shoes ypu Also clearly can see the sole inside pushing on the inside Wich makes a line that clearly can be seen even om the outside. This listing is way to generous Brad Pitt is on a good day without shoes with huge heel and or lift soles inside same height 1cm up then Matt Damon Thanks
Rising - 174 cm said on 10/Aug/17
@Pierre: It says the video isn't available. The difference can look more if George slouches, but again, George was about 5'11.5" in shoes at his peak, which is why he claimed 5'11.5", but Pitt even in his bigger shoes probably only reached 184, maybe 185 cm. Differences can always look smaller or bigger than they are, especially when you have a man like George who slouches and a man like Brad who always stands perfectly. I wouldn't take the biggest difference as an indicator, in fact, the smallest difference is likely to be closer to reality because of the aforementioned. Especially since Brad has a habit of moving himself closer to the camera, while George doesn't seem to do that.
Rising - 174 cm said on 10/Aug/17
We only have one pic for even a decent height comparison between Pitt and Paltrow barefoot and they're not standing straight in it, much less two. Going by their eye level and hairlines since the top of their heads are cut off(Paltrow's head is almost all in frame except the very top), Pitt looks about 2 cm taller. But look at how he's tilting his head down. I'm referring to the last pic in Richard's post. And it's taken from a side angle rather than straight on. You have to turn off your brain to think that just because shoes are eliminated as a factor, every other factor that can affect height somehow doesn't apply such as posture, angle, camera placement etc. Being barefoot doesn't magically make all those factors disappear. So to mock those of us who want to judge based on more than a single photo is obnoxious. I happen to think he's whopping half inch taller than 5'10", are you telling me one photo with neither standing their tallest can determine with complete accuracy someone's height to the half inch? Even photos with both standing perfectly, side by side taken directly in front can vary that much.
Slothee said on 10/Aug/17
The average guess keeps creeping downward towards 5'10.5", but I honestly haven't thought of him as much lower than 5'11". 5'10.75" would be the bare minimum I think
Hijopotamus said on 10/Aug/17
Guys, Gwyneth told in an interview she was barely or a little over 5'8

Now...we got Rob rating her as 5'9???
In any case, I had a gf that stood 5'9 and I'm 182 (183 morning, 181 at night) and we have too many pics together both barefoot at same ground level and there's not a single pic we look same height as Brad and Gwyneth. Not even close!
Editor Rob: if anybody can find the clip or know the year it would help.
Redford said on 10/Aug/17
He doesn't hide his lifts and he puts himself as 183 cm or 6 ft tall. If you subtract the lifts, 5 cm or 2 inches, from his final height, the result is 178 cm or 5'10 ft for him. According to the height comparison Pitt-Paltrow.
Pierre said on 10/Aug/17
@Rising=i have find the video with a better quality inwhich you can see more the difference=(around 0:54)= Click Here
Filippo said on 10/Aug/17
We have a couple of pics of him barefoot with a barefoot Paltrow, both standing straight, and some still argue about the heels he could have worn or not worn in come particular event.
As Hijo pointed out before, we all should deal with the fact that brad is 5'10.
Richard said on 10/Aug/17
Rob you really think Pitt is only 2" shorter than Tarantino?
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
And again with Paltrow
Click Here
With that angle a 5'11" man should give the impression of a 6" not a 5'10" or less.
Rob, and others, you should be objective. Photos with Paltrow, as well as with Jennifer Aniston, clearly show that he is between 177-178 cm, no more. To say that the photo doesn't have the right angle, that they are not completely straight, or whatever, it just indicates that Brad Pitt as well as other actors can't be lowered to a certain height because it would discredit them.
With shoes, lifts and others tricks he obviously reach 180-185 cm mark as Tom Cruise reach 177-178 cm with 3 cm dress shoes and 3-4 cm lifts inside.
If he is really 5'11" at age 24 he would say he was 6' like 99.9% of people that use the US/UK metric system. After all these proves and he declared 5'11" means he's probably 5'10".
Richard said on 10/Aug/17
Rob you really think Pitt is only 2" shorter than Tarantino?
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
Click Here
And again with Paltrow
Click Here
With that angle a 5'11" man should give the impression of a 6" not a 5'10" or less.
Rob, and others, you should be objective. Photos with Paltrow, as well as with Jennifer Aniston, clearly show that he is between 177-178 cm, no more. To say that the photo doesn't have the right angle, that they are not completely straight, or whatever, it just indicates that Brad Pitt as well as other actors can't be lowered to a certain height because it would discredit them.
With shoes, lifts and others tricks he obviously reach 180-185 cm mark as Tom Cruise reach 177-178 cm with 3 cm dress shoes and 3-4 cm lifts inside.
If he is really 5'11" at age 24 he would say he was 6' like 99.9% of people that use the US/UK metric system. After all these proves and he declared 5'11" means he's probably 5'10".
Editor Rob: I just can't see Brad as short as 5ft 10...the absolute worst I'd even try to argue is 5ft 10.5
Rising - 174 cm said on 9/Aug/17
@Pierre: In fairness I'll say that I have suspected Pitt of wearing lifts at that handprint/footprint event. Even so, while everyone can have their own burden of proof, mine is a shot of Pitt's ankle exposed and visibly too high. I don't know if you've followed the Michael Douglass or Mel Gibson pages, but if so, I mean a shot like the ones I've posted there. Shots like this have also been posted for Cruise and Stallone.

But Pitt was nowhere near 2.75" taller that day or any day, even now. Here's video of that day: Click Here The difference may have been about an inch or so when Clooney had comparable posture. Photos can be off, especially when they're not full and the angle is high or low. For instance, Clooney even while slouching is almost as tall here: Click Here Maybe that photo favors George, but if you watch the video, Pitt isn't that much taller until George slouches.

I'm fairly certain George was 5'11.5" in shoes in his prime, so I could never believe Pitt standing nearly 3 inches taller as that would put Brad at nearly 189 cm in shoes. But as I said, I've posted more than once I was suspicious Pitt may have worn lifts at the event you posted. Although I'd say if he did, they were probably more 2", MAYBE 2.3"-2.4" at most, imo. I do think for the real controversial heights, we have to maintain pretty strict evidentiary standards meaning full pics, preferably series of pics and videos while being wary of high and low angles or one person noticeably closer to the camera. I'm not saying not to post anything that doesn't fit that criteria, but I am saying we should take it with a grain of salt if it doesn't match those standards.
Pierre said on 9/Aug/17
Click Here = little bonus=Georges shoes in this famous event=at least 1 inch ...
Hijopotamus said on 9/Aug/17
@Rising, si a couple of barefoot pics right beside a barefoot girl is not enough for you but any pic wearing weird custom shoes with "you don't know the size of the lift inside" is good enough data to guess his height? You are delusional.

Ok, according to you Gwyneth must be 5'10" minimum,right? Well, people that actually met her say she's 5'8" ish and I know people that know her from her Talavera de la Reina times in Spain.
My sisters husband met Pitt in the 90s and describes him as "short and bad skin". This guy is 181cm and he is very precise finicky.
You really don't have a clue of what really Brad is hidding in those shoes that look normal. Elevators are what are about!
Rent said on 9/Aug/17
5'11" is a real good height, it's not because some men are 6'3" or more than 5'11" is short! Generally, average height is about 5'8"-5'9" , so we can feeling good if we're at 5'11" ;-).
Pierre said on 9/Aug/17
Click Here =Brad and Georges in sneakers this time(take in consideration Brad is a lot closer to the camera then logically advantaged,Georges isn't looking very straight)....
Pierre said on 9/Aug/17
@Rising= All the big elevator shoes doesn't look always like in the picture you post imo = Click Here Click Here =this shoes are very discreet but = Click Here Click Here Click Here .I think we can not talk about only 2 inches shoes here=Brad is looking around 2.75 inches taller than Georges imo and Georges isn't barefoot he's probably in around 1 inch shoes...
Dmeyer said on 8/Aug/17
Slim 182 , it ends the lift rumor as those shoes are regular cuban heeled dress shoes 4cm heels that probably give 3,2-3,5cm on height cause of pivoting
Jug said on 8/Aug/17
He's only 5'11, and he doesn't claim to be taller than that (to his credit). He does have a well-proportioned frame and this makes him look taller. He wears lifts a lot but never major ones like Downey, Jr.
Rising - 174 cm said on 8/Aug/17
Btw, Tarantino is not the best reference since his bizarre posture can make his own height fluctuate by several inches. He can make himself look similar height to 5'9" Kurt Russell, but then stretch up over 6 feet at other times.
Slim 182 cm said on 8/Aug/17
Brad sitting I haven't read how to detect lifts, judge 4 urselves.

Click Here
Rising - 174 cm said on 8/Aug/17
I noticed that about Brad supplementing his height with a hat as well when he's gone without big heels or boots. Don't get me wrong, I have suspicions Brad has worn lifts since the mid 90s, but I'm talking about proof meaning a shot of Brad sitting with his ankle exposed and visibly high. He's not the same height as Paltrow either. Whether barefoot or in shoes. If he was the same height barefoot then his eyes wouldn't be higher despite his head down, nor would almost all her head be in frame frame while at least an inch of his was cut out. Of course, barefoot pics are nice, but pics where people actually stand straight are nicer. But seeing her in flats and Converse slouching with Brad standing straight in boots, it was apparent to me he wasn't a full 2 inches taller. And when she actually wore heels, Brad turned to a good old chunky 90s boot: Click Here And no, he shouldn't reach the 6'2" mark, much less easily because he isn't wearing stuff like this: Click Here
Slim 182 cm said on 8/Aug/17
Brads still taller than two thirds of white guys, not bad. And if this guy gets a 5'10.76 downgrade, then Julia Roberts, Damon, Clooney, Garcia and all of his shorter cast mates should get downgraded as well, if not, then I'd keep his current listing.
Brad said on 7/Aug/17
Wedged up dress boots are the key with Brad so says Brad.
Hijopotamus said on 7/Aug/17
@Tom, a strong 5'11" you mean 181cm?

So with all the tricks he should reach the 6'2" mark easily. Funny when he is barefoot he is same height as 5'9" max Gwyneth Paltrow.

Rob, is this site about barefoot height or just height?
Slim 182 cm said on 7/Aug/17
Click Here

This absolutely ends it.

Click Here
Slim 182 cm said on 7/Aug/17
If it weren't for pitt wearing 1 cm of footwear at Berlin with Kruger and Venice with swinton , I bet he'd be listed Vin Diesels height... for sure. I've noticed that without a footwear advantage, pitt tends to wear hats.
Another good way to find pitts lift wearing proof is photos of him walking on stairs, as his pant ankle pulls.
Tom said on 7/Aug/17
strong 5'11"
Rent said on 6/Aug/17
Brad pitt is a lift wearer, no doubt about that, if some people need proofs... : Click Here
Here with 6'1" Tarantino, he's probably without lifts or just a little, I see 2 inches between them, so 5'11" is the absolutely max for Brad Pitt : Click Here: . But whatever we said, 5'11" it's still tall. You can be insecure even if you're Brad Pitt!!
Rising - 174 cm said on 6/Aug/17
1.25" + 1" lift doesn't actually give you 2.25" of height. You might get about 2" in actual height. 1.5" Cuban type heels are not the same as lifts and Pitt can't look anywhere near 4" taller than Clooney in even a somewhat decent comparison. And I'm not sure he could look a full inch shorter either. 1 cm, maybe a bit more if Clooney stood straight at Venice, but then Clooney looked to have thicker shoes. Height doesn't vary by 5 inches. Not even now that Clooney looks like he's lost 1 cm, imo. In their primes, Pitt could consistently pull off about 182 cm and Clooney could look no more than 177 cm at times with bad posture, so there may have been times it looked around 2", but no more unless Pitt moved noticeably closer to the camera as he seems fond of doing. I think Clooney has been about 1 cm shorter than Pitt the past half decade or so, which means the difference could possibly look a bit bigger since I've seen Clooney as short as 175-176 cm this year, but if Pitt was with Clooney at an event George was with Stacy Keibler, there's at least as good a chance Clooney was wearing lifts as Pitt.
Pierre said on 6/Aug/17
@Rising= Click Here Click Here Click Here =Brad always only 2 inches shoes?
blazer said on 6/Aug/17
Looking at the pics with Clooney, Brad can go from being an inch shorter to looking 4 inches taller. There is no doubt in my mind that Pitt is a lift wearer. If he had some consistency with his lifts it would probably go unnoticed.
Rent said on 5/Aug/17
Can appear taller sometimes, but for sure he's not higher than 5'11". Whatever, 5'11" that's tall!
Rent said on 5/Aug/17
ENJOY!! ;-)
Click Here
Matt179 said on 5/Aug/17
Also if you look at Ocean movies.

Damon look bulkier than clooney and pitt.

From what i can see, I can almost guess that Pitt and Clooney are almost following a Vegetarian diet.I can tell people diet by their body build.

Clooney got slender than his Emergency series days. Pitt was the biggest in troy. Damon was always bulkier of the 3. Thats why he look shorter and with his real height.
Matt179 said on 5/Aug/17
Adam levine, David Beckham, Those guys are exactly like pitt. Bodywise they are the same. Same type of genetics. Lean and slim. Not muscular and not fat.thats why they look taller than they are. Theyr physique make them look tall and easy to wear lifts/elevator shoes.

If you would put them side by side they would look exactly the same(Same body build).
Matt179 said on 5/Aug/17

Yes i think pitt is exactly 5foot11 Upon waking up and goes down true the day.

Its easy to look like a 6foot guy when you know what your doing.

You can buy Regular Dress shoes that have 1.25 Inch heels. Those are not elevators, they are regular dress black shoes with Heel that measure 1.25. I have those. You buy a 1 inch foam shoe lift and put it inside. Make 2.25 Inches of height. So if hes 5foot10.5 Miday Hes 6foot0.75 During the day. He look like a 6foot Barefoot guy. Pitt is very lean and doesnt have muscle mass.He has wide shoulder,narrow waist and small head. Everything to make it look tall. I estime is weight to be 150 to 160 pounds at 5foot11 upon waking.
Rising - 174 cm said on 4/Aug/17
@Pierre: I know, but the best way to find out if someone wears lifts is to see them sitting like that with their ankle visible, whether on a talk show or courtside at a basketball game. This is how Sly Stallone, Tom Cruise, Michael Douglas, Mel Gibson and others have been confirmed as lift wearers. Unfortunately, Pitt doesn't go on these talk shows much. But again, longer shoes don't suggest elevators. However, they could suggest insert lifts. Elevator shoes have lifts built into them and are shorter than someone's actual shoe size because the foot is in back. But if you use insert lifts, it's easier to fit them with a bigger size and especially easier to avoid a noticeable bulge with a bigger size. Pitt could have up to a 1" lift in your photo, but I couldn't say without seeing his ankle. This pic might be good if it were closer: Click Here This one is closer, but his pants just cover enough of his ankle to prevent me from being able to tell: Click Here I think if Pitt wears lifts, there's a good chance that's an occasion he wore them because he wound up at least 2 cm taller than Clooney: Click Here Yet earlier that day, he was clearly 1 cm shorter as you can see below in my response to blazer, possibly at least 2 cm if Clooney stood straighter. Also, while they're walking, it looks like Pitt is walking in heels: Click Here Of course, that could just be the cut of his pants and a 1.5" Cuban type heel as well, but like I said, if Pitt is a lift wearer, that would probably be a time he wore lifts.

@blazer: They're walking in your pic, which makes it worthless for judging who is taller. These are better examples of Clooney looking taller: Click Here Click Here

I do think Pitt was caught short that day because if Tilda Swinton is 187 cm in heels, Pitt doesn't look more than about 180 cm in those shose: Click Here

At the time of that event, some speculated Clooney was wearing lifts and Clooney did apparently wear lifts when he was with Stacy Keibler, but there's no evidence he did before. Clooney was never above 179 cm barefoot, imo, but Pitt probably had just 2 cm shoes while Clooney's look bulkier and possibly 3 cm. Pitt definitely looks proportionately shorter than usual.

@HonestSlovene: I agree. Even when Pitt looks shorter, he looks more 178-179, imo. Rob has Rick Schroder at 176.5 cm, if that was his height in Across the Tracks then Pitt would be about 179 because I saw up to an inch difference. If Pitt was 177 cm, they'd look about the same height. I thought Pitt looked about 3" taller than Christoph Waltz at the Berlin photocall and Waltz claims 170 cm, so Pitt was looking 178 or so then.
Hijopotamus said on 4/Aug/17
Slim, Clooney couldn't care less. It's Brad the one that wears lifts in the beach. That should say something...
blazer said on 4/Aug/17
@Slim 182, look at the pic again and the position of their feet. Click Here Then tell me how much closer to the camera you think Clooney is wise guy. Face it, someone forgot to wear their tall shoes that day.
Slim 182 cm said on 4/Aug/17
@blazer, Clooney stood closer to the camera, wise guy.
blazer said on 4/Aug/17
Wow! Do you all believe Pitt is 5'11 without his custom lifts? He is 5'9-5'10 at the most. At least rdj admits to wearing lifts. Pitt just wears the lifts and acts like it's normal. Look at the pic with Clooney that Pitt looks 3 inches shorter! He forgot his heels that day obviously.
Rising - 174 cm said on 3/Aug/17
@Rob: Thanks, I couldn't tell in that pic, but it's rare to have a chance to see Pitt's ankle like that.

@Pierre: I say 1.5", maybe 2". I'm making allowances for possible unknowns when I say that. I don't think there's too much proof Pitt has as big as 2" often, but it's possible on occasion. He's definitely worn 1.5" based on the heel and at least a little more based on the fact he's worn cowboy boots at times over the years and those add 1.6"-1.7" to your height. I was just going to say what Rob said as well. Elevators are shorter because the foot is up in the back, like a woman's heel. A long shoe could only point to lifts if Pitt had wanted to put insert lifts in boots that didn't have lifts built in because for insert lifts, buying a size too big is something I'd recommend.

Do you think Burt Reynolds didn't have the best elevator boots? The man spent over 6 figures on toupees!
Grey said on 3/Aug/17
HonestSlovene said on 3/Aug/17
He practically never appears as low as 177 cm, even with Tarantino he looked like a solid 178 cm guy.
HonestSlovene said on 3/Aug/17
@Michael I agree, it is upper average/strong average/bordering tallish range for a white western man living in Europe/US/Canada/Australia and New Zealand. 178 cm is the actual average height.
HonestSlovene said on 3/Aug/17
179 cm or 180 cm flat is ok or upper 5'10" range. 177 cm range or less is silly, as well as 181 cm + .
Pierre said on 3/Aug/17
Click Here =I want to say like in the picture= if the feet is shorter than the shoes the vertical angle and lift seem more discreet;the space between the front of the shoes and the toes can be full and then the foot does no slide(this is only a theoy)
Pierre said on 3/Aug/17
@Rising =the shoes you show to Rob are not looking the most massive elevator shoes Brad could wear imo =Click Here this are looking better elevator shoes=very probably longer than his feet with good vertical angle just after the toes and very probably very high shoes over his feet
Michael said on 2/Aug/17
180 is a nice height for a man.
Anon2 said on 2/Aug/17
5'10.5'' to 5'11''
Pierre said on 2/Aug/17
@rising=Of course Rob's shoes are 3"8' so 9.56 cm!I talk about 7/8 cm.They are not the same shoes! You take the extreme.And i have never say Rob's shoes were the better elevator shoes in the world for the discreet.One more time you have no more proofs Brad isn't in 2"7 shoes.His shoes seem to be sometimes long and his feet can be easily shorter than his shoes and so take a big vertical angle just after the toes(like woman shoes) because his shoes are looking very vertical so the angle can be more discreet = Click Here =Only his external heel give him at least 3 good cm + insole + lifts = 2"7 inches is always possible imo.Of course i have not absolute proofs and you know very weel i can not have more proofs(And what i say -when i say 2"7'is possible- is only suppositions)Then you too you have not absolute proofs when you say he can have 2 inches shoes.Same examples with this=Click Here Click Here =very long and vertical shoes.
Editor Rob: long shoes doesn't really mean fact the reverse is true. When you put the foot up by 1-1.5 inches, the overall length of the foot becomes smaller, so the length of the elevator is smaller so the foot doesn't slip.
Rising - 174 cm said on 2/Aug/17
Rob, since this is probably the best pic I've seen to judge Pitt's boots, would you say these are normal or elevators? Click Here
Editor Rob: that shoe looks pretty normal, although as we always say, a half inch lift is far harder to spot...
Rising - 174 cm said on 2/Aug/17
@Pierre: No, because 1.5"-2" shoes can be proven by the heel on Brad's shoes. 3"+ shoes requires a lot of assumptions and a burden of proof that it's even possible to look like Pitt with them. My estimate for Pitt's shoes is based on what we can prove. It's not up to me to disprove a negative as I told you. That last part is not up for debate. The size of Pitt's shoes is a debate, but not about burden of proof and disproving a negative. You don't establish something exists simply by proclaiming it and then proclaiming it can't be disproven. Otherwise, the debate on God, afterlife, ghosts, psychics etc. would be over.

Here's Rob with elevators that give 3.8": Click Here
The closest I've seen to that from a big name would be Burt Reynolds: Click Here

You can think whatever you want, but if you want to convince others, you'll have to offer proof.

Here's a couple of examples of the type of boots Pitt wears
Click Here Click Here Click Here
Click Here Click Here Click Here Click Here

These are examples of the boots Pitt wore on the red carpet and probably caused Rob to mention his footwear in the first place. At the first event at Cannes, Pitt looks to have about 1.5" heels, but does look to struggle to even reach 6 feet at times if Jolie is 5'9" in heels and I'm not sure how big the heels she wore were when she was that far along in her pregnancy. At the second event, we see she does have big heels - possibly 8 cm - while Pitt has 1.5" type heels again. I can tell you I wear Cuban heels and then put lifts inside, never less than a 1" lift and at times, even a 2" lift and I measured myself the other day and was no more than 181 cm in 7 cm Cuban heels with an extra 2.5 cm lifts inside. Why is this relevant you ask? Well, the front of Pitt's boots are no thicker than mine - not more than 3/8" thick - so his boots aren't capable of anything physically that mine aren't. On top of that, his heels are smaller. When I measured a few years back with 2" Cubans and 1" lifts, I was only 5'10.75". Pitt doesn't have 2" on the outside heel, much less the aforementioned 2.75" I have. And for a 1" lift, you'll see signs of it in the boot, except for maybe if you get it 2 sizes too big because even when I wear 1.5 sizes too big, I can still see the difference the lift makes inside my boot. If Pitt had a custom elevator boot, it'd be shorter in length than normal, but I doubt that's the case because a normal thickness in the front would be counterproductive to that end. And if he's using inserts, he'd need to buy a bigger size than normal to fit over 1" comfortably.

Like I said, that style is pretty typical for Pitt and it seemed to come around the time he was most concerned with his height. Now Pitt has worn bulkier styles at times with a thicker sole, so those are worth being examined, but as a Cuban heel + lift wearer myself, I'm confident in times like these he's not wearing a lift big enough to give him near 3".

@Hijopotamus: I do agree he's probably about 6 feet in boots there.
Pierre said on 2/Aug/17
@Rising= To resume you say Brad's shoes can be 2"0' max and i say Brad's shoes can be 3"0'=then i have nothing to proove more than you,you must proove his lifts can be 2"0' if i go with your logic....but you will never prove that you say,you have never measured Brad's shoes...
Hijopotamus said on 2/Aug/17
Montana, there are other pics of him and her that same photo shoot and Pitt looked clearly taller. I'd say he stands 6 feet tall with shoes on.
The thing is that who knows what footwear advantage Brad was using.
Rising - 174 cm said on 2/Aug/17
Actually, Claudia claimed 181 cm in metric and then 5'11" in feet/inc hes. Pitt looks a strong 6 feet there if you ignore posture, but she's bending her knee a lot and slouching. Here's a better photo of the two and Brad honestly isn't much taller: Click Here

She's almost barefoot, while his boots have a pretty good heel on them as usual. Ultimately, he looks more how a 5'11" guy would look in a typical shoe when she stands a little better as he looks to reach about 6' or so in those boots.
Rising - 174 cm said on 2/Aug/17
Actually, Claudia claimed 181 cm in metric and then 5'11" in feet/inc hes. Pitt looks a strong 6 feet there if you ignore posture, but she's bending her knee a lot and slouching. Here's a better photo of the two and Brad honestly isn't much taller: Click Here

She's almost barefoot, while his boots have a pretty good heel on them as usual. Ultimately, he looks more how a 5'11" guy would look in a typical shoe when she stands a little better as he looks to reach about 6' or so in those boots.
Christian-6'5 3/8 said on 2/Aug/17
Rampage is known for inflating most celebs. I wouldn't be surprised if Rampage genuninely thinks that Claudia is a legit 6'0"
Montana said on 1/Aug/17
Click Here

Click Here

Click Here

He looks the same height as her while her knees appear to be on a higher level lol
Montana said on 1/Aug/17
@Rampage: Looks a very strong 6ft w/h Claudia Schiffer!

Strong? Looks really weak to me. Claudia claimed in the 90s to be 1.78 m on german TV, which is like 5'10. In this pic with Pitt, not only is she slouching, but she wears the flattest shoes for a woman and she is pregnant. Yet Brad standing tall with better posture, thick boots and wearing a cap barely manages to look taller than her at all
Pierre said on 1/Aug/17
@Rampage=Claudia is maybe not exactly 5"11' she's in a very relaxed posture which make her lose lots of height,Brad is very straight like a I and has a good advantage of shoes and maybe lifts
Rising - 174 cm said on 1/Aug/17
Pierre said on 1/Aug/17
@Rising say on 31/08/17="That's as unscientific as anything i've ever read.The burden of proof is on you to prove he has worn them".
Imo what you answer to me is the proof you have no real arguments to prove the opposite :)

What part of "you can't disprove a negative" don't you understand? You can't prove to me you're not a serial killer. Of course, the burden of proof isn't on you to disprove it. This would be just about lesson #1 in a logic class. I'm not trying to be rude, but I'm really stunned.

@Dan: I don't think people who haven't worn lifts realize just how big a 1" lift is, much less over that. To prove lifts, we really need shots of Pitt sitting down with his ankle visible and too high. The absence of that doesn't mean he doesn't wear them, but until then it will be conjecture.
Rampage(-_-_-)Clover said on 1/Aug/17
Looks a very strong 6ft w/h Claudia Schiffer!
Hijopotamus said on 1/Aug/17
Click Here

If he hasn't packed big lifts inside those shoes then he has the weirdest looking feet ever
Slim 182 cm said on 1/Aug/17
Rising - 174 cm said on 31/Jul/17
Pierre said on 29/Jul/17
@Rising said on 28/Jul/17=@Hijopotamus:there's no real proof Brad has worn 2.7" type elevator.
And there's no real proof Brad has not worn 2.7" type elevator .

That's as unscientific as anything I've ever read. You can't disprove a negative. The burden of proof is on you to prove he has worn them.


Pierre said on 1/Aug/17
@Rising say on 31/08/17="That's as unscientific as anything i've ever read.The burden of proof is on you to prove he has worn them".
Imo what you answer to me is the proof you have no real arguments to prove the opposite :)
Pierre said on 1/Aug/17
@Rising say on 31/08/17="That's as unscientific as anything i've ever read.The burden of proof is on you to prove he has worn them".
Imo what you answer to me is the proof you have no real arguments to prove the opposite.
Dan said on 1/Aug/17
I absolutely believe Pitt has gotten 2.5"-3" in boost from boots and inserts. Several of the big boots he's worn have 1.25"- 1.5" heels and thick midsole. Throwing 1.25"-1.5" lifts inside will get you over two inches
Pierre said on 31/Jul/17
The estimation of Jon Berthal's height is very difficult,in the first pic next to Rob he look like 6"0' in the second like a weak 5"10'...then give a height to Brad next to Jon (and both in shoes...) seem very hard to me
Rising - 174 cm said on 31/Jul/17
Pierre said on 29/Jul/17
@Rising said on 28/Jul/17=@Hijopotamus:there's no real proof Brad has worn 2.7" type elevator.
And there's no real proof Brad has not worn 2.7" type elevator .

That's as unscientific as anything I've ever read. You can't disprove a negative. The burden of proof is on you to prove he has worn them.
Slim 182 cm said on 30/Jul/17
Does it really matter if this guys 5'10 or 5'11?
Being taller or shorter than brad pitt isn't going to change your life.

Heights are barefeet estimates, derived from quotations, official websites, agency resumes, in person encounters with actors at conventions and pictures/films.

Other vital statistics like weight, shoe or bra size measurements have been sourced from newspapers, books, resumes or social media.

Celebrity Fan Photos and Agency Pictures of stars are © to their respective owners.